A "tech geek's" comment inspired by the Sony A7S release...
I appreciate the quality of codec/bitrates of the new Panasonic GH4 (there are several first examples available online), the maturity and all-round versatility of the system, as well as its plethora of great improvements (like the “depth-for-defocus†contrast-detection AF). However, there is one thing on GH4 I have never found to be the most elegant technical solution. Namely, it is rather high megapixel score (16MP).
I do suppose for a motion-stills/video oriented micro 43 camera the optimal resolution would be 12+MP. The arguments are straightforward:
1. 12+MP on a micro 43 sensor is a “native†resolution for the academy DCI 4K standard (4096×2160 pixels). On GH4, DCI 4K is supported in the crop mode (x2 vs x2.3), owing to the higher horizontal resolution of its 16MP sensor (4608 pixels). To note: x2 vs. x2.3 crop is noticeably less pleasant for a video maker (!).
2. Higher continuous shooting rates for stills: 30% speed-up in the continuous shooting does matter (!).
3. Slightly lower ISO noise (and slightly higher dynamic range) in the video and pictures’ modes.
For the motion-stills/video-oriented cameras (1) and (2) is much more important than extra 4 MP in stills. B.t.w, I lived a quite happy stills’ live with my G2 – just be thorough with composition and no need to crop :).
There are well-known successful examples of the strategy (“less MP = more speed/IQâ€) in the DSLR world (Nikon D4 (16MP/FF), Canon 1D (18MP/FF)… And now – “suddenly†appeared at NAB, the first 4K mirrorless full-frame Sony A7S.
As compared to the GH4, A7S has lower bandwidth/processing power (50 Mbps vs. 200 Mpbs for 1K, UHD (3840×2160) vs. DCI resolution, 4:2:2/8 bits vs. 4:2:2/10 bits etc.) with the advantage in the high ISO of course. Note that A7s has also 14 bit RAW for stills. However I would rather applaud Sony for limiting the sensor resolution by 12MP. It is a very harmonic engineering solution for the motion-oriented hybrid camera.
Dreaming forward about 4K on micro 43… I would like to see two lines of Panasonic sensors: 16MP for the stills-oriented cameras and 12MP for the motion-oriented ones. For that I would gladly pay extra. Apparently, Panasonic thought about it more than me. Sadly, they do not follow this path likely due to the high financial burden for maintaining the two lines of the "perfect" sensors on one consumer’s products line. This is in contrast to Sony which always seem to have enough cash to sit on several sits (e.g. A7, A7R, A7S, NEX, ... )…
PS I do not intend to compare 4K/micro 43 vs. 4K/mirrorless-FF as systems themselves here: the pro/cons are be basically the same as for the stills’ counterparts.
"The reason 4:2:2 is left out of the compressed internal recording on the GH4, is to maintain manageable file sizes in 4K and 1080p."
Is that the reason? Canon figured out how to do this at 50mb and the GH4 is touted to record 200mb, they could've have offered 1080p / 200mb at 4:2:2. Since few clients if any ask for a 4k deliverable these days this would have made this camera a must have in any DP's pocket. I'm thinking they don't want to cannibalize the sales of their 4:2:2 video cameras. Canon knows this strategy well. Hopefully the Russians will hack into it and release 4:2:2 beast.
ZZ VISUAL got a reaction from Ratguity in Perfectionist's Whining: 4K on 12MP
ZZ VISUAL reacted to Tim Naylor in Which 4K camera for the masses? GH4 vs Blackmagic Production Camera